Quote: Kev F @ October 27 2011, 9:37 AM BSTAs for the allegation that The Sitcom Mission started audience voting so they could sell more tickets, that is arse-about-face bollocks and you can expect a reply on that subject from Declan and Simon!
Kev F
It was an observation in defence of your system Kev not an allegation of anything. And they did introduce it through the run of the last competition as far as I remember.
I thought I'd post a few notes on my experiences of the finals of The Sitcom Trials in Manchester.
Firstly, the cast did an excellent job with consistently good performances for each of the script readings.
Being lucky enough to have my script in the final, I re-read the other four and noted some well crafted lines I thought were guaranteed to get big laughs. As with my script, some of these 'laugh' lines seemed to pass the audience by, where others hit the target. This left me with the biggest impression of all and made me think that even the slightest shift in nuance can make all the difference in getting a line embedded with the audience at the vital moment - it's live and there are no replays or reviewing, as would be available when reading the script for example. I can't say how much that point impressed me and the value of going along to the performance to experience it.
The format of bare stage and script in hand reading, it seemed to me, suited a two hander script, where the audience's attention was held on the two characters and their exchanges, throughout. I felt that really benefited Debbie's script, which was pretty well written in the first place.
The bottom line for me is that there are tricks to the trade which apply to on-line competitions and live performances alike. Quite truthfully, I've learned a lot from this experience, and those are my thoughts.
It was this probably that made me think it.
https://www.comedy.co.uk/forums/thread/19191/129/
'Hello all
Ok, here's the beef.
Tickets haven't sold well for the shows. We did actually send out a blog email to all 1200+ writers who entered telling them about the shows, and so far there's been little to no response. We've taken a hit financially so we're going to make some changes.
First off, next week's 7.30 show has been reduced to £5. That's two sketch groups, two sitcoms, an improv group and the Beta Males for £5. Please come, we'd appreciate it.
Secondly, we'll be introducing an audience vote element to the July 4 and July 11 shows. Simon, Claire and Declan will decide on four of the sitcoms to go through to the Grand Final, and one is to go through on audience numbers.
Really looking forward to seeing you at a future show.
Cheers, Declan'
Like I said it wasn't a criticism, I don't like the voting system, but it's not my show or money. And it's not as if it was being hidden. I guess when prizes are up then things do get muddier.
Okay Marc, you seem to have been right about the Sitcom Mission re-introducing audience voting at one stage. I hadn't kept up to speed with that happening, sorry for slurring you.
Also, off-line, I have learnt that another of the writers at the Manchester Trials actually voted for someone else's script, which would seem to balance things out again.
Now shut up the lot of you, or you'll put me off the whole idea of dong any more of these things! Or would you rather not have a Manchester Sitcom Trials, a London Sitcom Trials and possibly a Bristol Sitcom Trials, all in spring 2012? (Not promising anything, but just dangling the carrot).
Kev F
So the real question is how to get more bums on seats. A large, impartial audience is the best for everyone involved. Perhaps we could set up another thread with ideas for how to achieve this, ideas that don't depend on the writers and their friends turning up.
By the way, here's a profile page for the actress Michelle Ashton:
http://www.castingcallpro.com/uk/view.php?uid=243148
Apparently her acting skills include combat and ballet! I must write this into my next script! I've only seen the clips of her in the sitcom trials but I think she's put in fantastic performances. Hopefully she'll be famous soon so more people can enjoy her work.
Edit: A London Sitcom Trials would be great for me as I might be able to make it to the performance. But would Michelle Ashton be able to bring her combat ballet skills down sarf?
Edit2: Kev, you're not supposed to admit you were wrong. That goes against every message board convention known to Mankind!
No worries Kev. TAPS used to do it very well with performed readings Evan. But they did have a load of funding and all kinds of industry backing. Sadly I don't think they are running anymore. I personally would take the competition element away from these kind of things, being a runner up once, but that makes it a different kind of beast. And to be fair to everyone shows don't get on TV due to a meritocracy in place. The screenwriter's Workshop Sitcom Showcase model worked very well, ahem, but it took a lot of goodwill and effort with no financial, or possible financial, reward. And it needed new blood with contacts and will etc to take up the baton after a while and that proved tricky. And like, I said, it was a different kind of beast.
I think a lot of people agree the voting system is fundamentally flawed, it might be time for Kev to bite the bullet on this one and at least consider alternatives...
I also think this last competition was somewhat hurried, to me it seemed all a bit too last minuteish and that's maybe why there were so few entries this time compared to the previous competition...
I attended the trials on Friday night and thought it might be a useful exercise for the writers, to show my original feedback and then update it based on how the scripts came across to me when the cast performed them on the night.
As Plain As Day - Maybe
Some nice lines but feels like it needs more work - needs to either get more credible or much sillier.
Friday Night Feedback
This really was funny on the night - not sure why on reading the script I thought it needed to be sillier - the silliness of the Panda thing really worked with the audience and I laughed out loud a lot. The female Italian character and Day's Boss, were well written on the page and they played out fantastically well on stage.
Doing It For The Kids - No
Really liked the character of Clive, and some nice lines for Pearl - a Charity Shop is a good situation with a lot of potential but think it needs more work on the humour.
Friday Night Feedback
This was very funny on the night and for me worked a load better being read than on the page - the character of Clive was played to a tee by the actor and only just managed to steal the show from Pearl - it was lovely, warm, traditional comedy and you could picture which TV actor would play what role really well.
Leaping Tiger - Yes
Very silly - very funny - just loved it - laughed out loud a lot.
Friday Night Feedback
This was still my favourite and got my vote on the night as well as in the pre-round. It was just bonkers funny and the characters were all strong enough to stand alone and will no doubt have a good run in whatever situation they end up in. The first big laugh at "Sc**thorpe" made me laugh out loud with everyone else again on the night - even though I knew it was coming.
The Mad Axe-Man and Her - Yes
My script so I'm saying yes cos I wouldn't have posted it if I didn't think it was OK but a read through now it has been posted confirms it could have done with another few of drafts but still think it has the potential to work on stage/in the pub so I'm sticking with yes.
Friday Night Feedback
The two characters were characters I'd grown really fond of in a novel I've just finished the first draft of and - not wanting to let them go - I decided to see how they worked out in a sitcom environment, so wrote it up and took a punt on entering Sitcom Trials.
On the pre-round I got a lot of really objective and useful feedback - one reader gave me a "no" because there was too much swearing - this was absolutely bourne out on Friday night - the gag of the guy swearing was over-played - a good editing note for the next draft. Some of the lines that appeared to read funny on the page were lost on the night and just passed the audience by - all points to take forward in the next draft.
The Tragic Life of Roger Bullwark - Yes
Liked the idea and the characters - started really well - loved the whole Hypochondriac thing and Zac turning up but felt Zak stepped over the line from being funny/supporter of Roger to being a bit nasty towards the end and he lost me - think it needs another couple of drafts though.
Friday Night Feedback
The audience seemed to immediately "get" this - I loved it, but stand by my original feedback that Zac moved over a line and for me came across as too hard on Roger towards the end and I think needs to be more supportive without being less funny - no idea how you do that though? Even though it was hard for it to be done proper justice on the little stage, because of the different locations it still went down a storm opening the show.
Sitcom Trials Feedback
As wanabe writers we all know it is incredibly hard if not impossible, to get your words read and receive objective feedback from complete strangers. Having now gone through the process here's my feedback on it.
I disagree that getting a "no" is too harsh a process, providing the "no" is qualified with the reasons why it hasn't appealed to the reader. One of the "no's" I got was because there was "too much swearing" and as it turned out was bang on the money - on the reading the overplay on the swearing detracted from the gag or story point being made. This "no" is probably the most useful bit of feedback and edit note I've had from the process. Also reading other peoples scripts and having to provide feedback is a really good opportunity to enable you to analyse your own work more objectively.
Thank you for providing us all with the opportunity of putting our words out there, Kev. Long may The Trials continue as an open and trusted environment for new comedy work to be developed.
Thank you to Kev for providing us all with the opportunity of reading others work and honing our own.
Hi, just to reiterate that we did indeed reintroduce voting towards the end of last year's Sitcom Mission. We lost a whole chunk of money from the shows this year and it was damage limitation.
We didn't want to have a voting system because we don't think you can judge art out of 10, but as is being proven here, a voting system gives people some form of ownership and connection to the show. Democracy gives people the idea that they are involved and can influence, and we now embrace that. One of the Grand Finalists in 2012 will be via the audience vote.
Live sitcom, more than most art forms, is hugely collaborative, and this includes the audience, who we look upon as an extra member of the cast.
I only wanted the votes clarified as I wondered if the reason why Kev felt he had to discuss the official winner with others before announcing it was because the winner was present with friends on the night and they voted for the winning script. That was the only reason because I think everyone thought it was strange that even though there was a winner on the night the overall winner was only announced after a discussion with the production team.
To be fair to Kev he could of easily went with the winner on the night without any post discussion maybe this would of actually been easier and stopped any debating over the voting system.
Quote: Declan @ October 27 2011, 11:30 AM BSTHi, just to reiterate that we did indeed reintroduce voting towards the end of last year's Sitcom Mission. We lost a whole chunk of money from the shows this year and it was damage limitation.
We didn't want to have a voting system because we don't think you can judge art out of 10, but as is being proven here, a voting system gives people some form of ownership and connection to the show. Democracy gives people the idea that they are involved and can influence, and we now embrace that. One of the Grand Finalists in 2012 will be via the audience vote.
Live sitcom, more than most art forms, is hugely collaborative, and this includes the audience, who we look upon as an extra member of the cast.
I think you have a nice compromise there Declan with 'one' of the Grand Finalists being via audience vote, and the panel judging overall. The wild card aspect I guess.
Or the 'four wild cards' aspect 
Dan
Debbie and Evertson: Thanks for your feedback on the live performance. Despite-or perhaps because of-the ups and downs, I really enjoy this comp. Much better than getting an anonymous rejection by email, any road up.
Yes it is a competition and any exposure is great!I'm sure Kev is having another show next year, so keep looking.